Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258482 comments on the Webbunny tumblelog story from Jul 18, 2009, titled Atheism requires as much faith as religion?. In it, Webbunny tumblelog reports that:

Atheism requires as much faith as religion? bearvspuma : The only problem with this rationalization is that ita s assuming all athiests are so because theya re intelligent in the ways of science and reasoning and all people that believe in a form of god are unintelligent.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Webbunny tumblelog.

Since: May 13

Trenton, NJ

#166382 May 31, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Yes I deleted your apologetic opinion piece that is completely devoid of fact.
Bottom line on today's secular society we find the practice of owning another human being as a slave is abhorrent and detestable. The god in your bible myth thought that a person owning another person is fine.
He says you can beat them, just so long as they can stand up after two days. Now think about that. Just think about that. As a kid you were probably in some fights right? Both of you probably messed up, roughed up, bleeding noses bruises everywhere. Still most likely both of you were able to get up and go home. Now imagine how cruel and vicious a beating would need to be to require two days of rest before you can stand up again as the bible days is okay? Barbaric!
The bible clearly says you can have sex with a female slave. Rape.
The bible even says how to go and buy slaves from other countries and they are your slaves for life as are any children they have. You even admit these slaves really had no rights.
I could go on and on but the bottom line is your god happily allowed for life long slavery, you can beat them, rape them, own and sell or use their children, even Jesus and Paul ordered slaves to obey their human master and return to them. There is no historical context that makes these barbaric practices okay.
In the time of Jesus many cultures and countries did not allow slavery. These people did just fine without slaves. I guess they just has better morals and a hold book that never mentioned slavery was approved by their god.
<quoted text>
3 quick points because it your asserting claims rather than supporting them logically, and appealing to the peronal dislike of the thing rather than dealing with it within the cultural context as well as within the logic.

1. my argument is factual, i not once have to appeal to emotion or anything you cant look up yourself to describe the way things were. what your argument consists of is a projection of your morals on top of that historical information of how things were. now the problem with your argument is that you dont interact with the history or the culture, ou merely take the cultural ideas we have now and push it ontop of the culture. and that doensnt work given the fac t that you havent even described the moral framework you have.

2. a beating doesnt have to be vicious for someone to end up almost dying or for them to die. there are people who get hit with one punch and they die because of being hit in a certain place or way. ive personally been in fights where people get knocked out in one hit, let alone some of the damage thats done.

3. again, your argument lacks foundation to defend the claims its making. are you telling me, that no matter what the shape or form or culture of the time, slavery is the same in all aspects? because since you lack the desire to even defend your views beyond your personal dislike of how things are persented to you, i have to ask background questions to even understand where your views are coming from. you havent even presented any historical data to back up your claims that people got allong without slavery. all cultures at some point or another had slavery in some way, shape, or form.

im not really serious in dealing with your post because it seems to me like your objections are little more than personal dislike. your not really relating it to anything. i know your an intelligent person, no doubt, but you have to form your arguments better than just personal dislikes of the wording. you need factual, historical comparisons.

“YO BOO”

Since: Sep 07

land of BOO

#166383 May 31, 2013
MESSAGE FROM Bro. Clownie TO ALL ATHEISTS: Hurry up and band together to fight Bro. Clownie the Anointed. The inept atheist morons that are posting on this thread right now, are making you dip-sticks look almost intelligent. Hurry up now, as those intelligent challenged twits need all the help they can get. And, Clownie the Anointed looks up toward Heaven and says to God, "Is this all the moronic atheists have"? And, God in his majestic voice says to the Anointed one, "I did warn you that you would be facing some of My worst rejects". "Yes you did, Lord!... my bad!"

“Exercise Your Brain”

Since: Jun 07

Planet Earth

#166384 May 31, 2013
T-Town Clown wrote:
<quoted text> Wrong again, Sapphire! Yours truly comes from a long line of intelligent beings, that God put on the face of the Earth to keep the low-life losers, heathen scumbags, and brainless twits like you
from hurting themselves. and you're in that category! Also, standing up to moral decadence, and twisted stupidity.
Bro. Clownie
If the above post is an example of your faith, you can keep it. Nothing says xtian love like namecalling.

So much for the "moral majority".

“Exercise Your Brain”

Since: Jun 07

Planet Earth

#166385 May 31, 2013
Ray puelerico wrote:
<quoted text>
3 quick points because it your asserting claims rather than supporting them logically, and appealing to the peronal dislike of the thing rather than dealing with it within the cultural context as well as within the logic.
1. my argument is factual, i not once have to appeal to emotion or anything you cant look up yourself to describe the way things were. what your argument consists of is a projection of your morals on top of that historical information of how things were. now the problem with your argument is that you dont interact with the history or the culture, ou merely take the cultural ideas we have now and push it ontop of the culture. and that doensnt work given the fac t that you havent even described the moral framework you have.
2. a beating doesnt have to be vicious for someone to end up almost dying or for them to die. there are people who get hit with one punch and they die because of being hit in a certain place or way. ive personally been in fights where people get knocked out in one hit, let alone some of the damage thats done.
3. again, your argument lacks foundation to defend the claims its making. are you telling me, that no matter what the shape or form or culture of the time, slavery is the same in all aspects? because since you lack the desire to even defend your views beyond your personal dislike of how things are persented to you, i have to ask background questions to even understand where your views are coming from. you havent even presented any historical data to back up your claims that people got allong without slavery. all cultures at some point or another had slavery in some way, shape, or form.
im not really serious in dealing with your post because it seems to me like your objections are little more than personal dislike. your not really relating it to anything. i know your an intelligent person, no doubt, but you have to form your arguments better than just personal dislikes of the wording. you need factual, historical comparisons.
No, one does not need "historical comparisons", it is what it is. That's much akin to the, "well....everyone else was doing it."

IOW, argumentum ad majorem is a fallacy.

Since: May 13

Trenton, NJ

#166386 May 31, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
If your view of slavery came from the bible, then you would not have a problem with owning slaves. You would not have a problem killing everyone in Pittsburgh. They house non-believers and you know how your god feels about that!
My view that slavery is wrong is derived from empathy. I can understand how a slave would feel and I would not want to feel that way. I can understand what it is like to be lied to, so I try my best not to lie. I would not want my daughter to be raped and then force her to marry her rapist, so I don't rape. Are you beginning to understand how this works?
black sheep, i like you. you are the first person to actually go beyond asserting a view and actually use logic to discribe part of there view. that shows a great amount of knowledge in presenting an argument, and for that i thank you.

now, surprisingly, my view of slavery does come from the bible. i take the bible and look at its entirety as an example of how God managed to move his people from having saves to becoming a non slave culture. remember the verse that says every 7 years all slaves are to go free regardless of if the master wants it or not? its the year of jubilee if i remember right. if you follow the pattern within the culture and throughout the bible, God moves his people away from the pattern of the time. given a brief examination of the details of the type of slavery they had, one sees that instead of being a way of harming and oppressing people, slavery in the hebrew culture was a form of social safety net, and was a way for a person to find security within another persons home.but remember, even today its hard enough to make ends meet. so when your dealing with another persons posessions, its even more serious. and also, there was the fact that some people did have debts to pay and in turn ended up having to work for the person to pay it off. now mind you, i dont have to assume any of this. all one has to do is study the history of slavery in that time in some detail, and this becomes apparent. i dindnt learn this stuff by reading christian books. i came to this reading history.

now, i can basically place your view on morality in he category do unto others as i want done to me. and thats a fine moral way of thinking, no doubt at all. the issue is that it doesnt provide a standard to judge others. taking that view into account, just because you dont want people to do things to you, it doesnt mean that it is morally wrong for them to do certain things. it goes back to what foundaton you have. your moral view is great in that its a great standard to hold personally. the problem is that it lacks the power to judge external issues beyond yourself.

Since: May 13

Trenton, NJ

#166387 May 31, 2013
albtraum wrote:
<quoted text>
No, one does not need "historical comparisons", it is what it is. That's much akin to the, "well....everyone else was doing it."
IOW, argumentum ad majorem is a fallacy.
wrong. hes making a claim that the slavery in the bible is wrong, im asking him to not only defend that claim on a factual level, but also to examine the details, which requires a historical comparison of what was really going on. he doesnt want to delve deeper, and in doing so hes really not defending his claims well. in mot saying that everyone is doing it so its fine. im saying that what he was saying about the history of slavery in cultures is wrong.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#166388 May 31, 2013
So there are cases in which a human owning another human like property would be okay in your eyes?
Ray puelerico wrote:
<quoted text>wrong. hes making a claim that the slavery in the bible is wrong, im asking him to not only defend that claim on a factual level, but also to examine the details, which requires a historical comparison of what was really going on. he doesnt want to delve deeper, and in doing so hes really not defending his claims well. in mot saying that everyone is doing it so its fine. im saying that what he was saying about the history of slavery in cultures is wrong.

“YO BOO”

Since: Sep 07

land of BOO

#166390 May 31, 2013
albtraum wrote:
<quoted text>
If the above post is an example of your faith, you can keep it. Nothing says xtian love like namecalling.
So much for the "moral majority".
Awww that ol mean clown hurt his feelings... what a p***y

“YO BOO”

Since: Sep 07

land of BOO

#166391 May 31, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
So there are cases in which a human owning another human like property would be okay in your eyes?
<quoted text>
another sissy boy... why are atheist weak girly boys

“YO BOO”

Since: Sep 07

land of BOO

#166392 May 31, 2013
albtraum wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, first one has to assume that the bible is true and then one can pick and choose, interpret and reinterprate. It seems that the man Jesus (whom he can't even prove the existance of) was more than content to just go with the flow and not upset the status quo. For a son of an "Almighty God", he seems rather timid and bland don't you think?
you aren't a very bright person so debating you would be useless even on a subject with merit. You can add very little to a conversation. You are in fact an idiot, I am not insulting you by the way, just describing you.

Bro. Clownie

Since: May 13

United States

#166393 May 31, 2013
Ray, your statement on slavery lasting only 7 years was only for Hebrew slaves. Other slaves were slaves for life, were to be "treated like property," and passed down through the family like heirlooms. That's in Leviticus. There's your factual defense.

_-Alice-_

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#166394 May 31, 2013
T-Town Clown wrote:
<quoted text>we can say you can't disprove GOD! and yes my sunday school will get some good laughs when I show your posts...
You still go to Sunday School?

Oh hell.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#166395 May 31, 2013
Ray puelerico wrote:
<quoted text>
it seems so odd to me that you avoided not only all that i asked for which woud have helped your assertion have some footing, but you also clarly pick and choose your verses. tell me, in that same book, what were the masters commanded to do? also, if your master wasnt christian,would you want him to be even more unfriendly to you just for being one? given the historical situation roman christians were in, pauls command was very useful for not getting beat by your master. second, its odd that you place what the verse says but nit how any of those things rlate to what the actual vrse says or to the culture. now i dont need to dress anything up. i gave you sufficient cultural answerss to a cultural objection you had. your wording indicats that you believe that youve made a releve=ant point or some kind of reasonable objection. now, lets do this again.
nonhebrew slaves didnot have the same rights as hebrew slaves. its logical because these are foreign people, possibly left over from war, who must be delt with in a manner to ensure strict rules are followed and that no one gets hurt. any nation no matter were even today places priority on its peoples freedoms over anyone eles.. this was also to ensure that people didnt go into israel and take advantage of the system in order to gain wealth. remember, if you are a slave, you gain specific wages, and aquire specific benefts.
its clear that you didnt read my point about the woman not leaving with the man. she owes the master her work. sh was a servant of his, she got married, and she has to finish off the time as a slave.she has responsabilities to fulfill, and that doesnt just stop when shes married. she does go free onthe seventh year, a fact you consistently overlook.and obviously the child needs the mother. he ot=r she cant stay with the father be cause he is busy using thefinances hes aquired throughhis time as a slave building is own property.
now, as for punishment, there was no jail back then, and so people got punished physically. thats how things were done. now remember that if the slave dies right away, the master dies too, so its within the best interst of the master to provide medical attention to his slave. if he does all he can, then he lives. if he lets his servant die, then he dies. the things were different then han it is now when it comes o being punished.
now mind you, none of this that you say is evidence for your case beyond the idea tht youdont like it.for your claims to be valid, you must answer within the context of yor accusation exactly how you are judging the bible, and by what framework. and the part about you saying that slavery is slavery underlines a missunderstanding you have about the subject, as well as a lack of historical reasoning behind your claims. in short, witout that evidence, it makes your claims weak if not invalid.
Doesn't it concern you that your religion has you defending slavery?

Since: May 13

Trenton, NJ

#166396 May 31, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
So there are cases in which a human owning another human like property would be okay in your eyes?
<quoted text>
this is a prime example of the fallacy of the assumed question. i never argued that it was an optimal thing, i argued that it was necesary for the culture as a safety net due to practical cultural needs. any personal dislikes about the way they did things back then is, well, personal. i cant convince you to up and like something. but my argument doesnt need to convince you, it just needs to show that you view doesnt correlate to the evil you assume its commiting. this is why these arguments dont lead anywhere. your asking me to make you like something you dont like, which makes this an argument based on moral preference. but if you had an argument with some foundation, it would be different. now im tired tonight, but maybe tomorrow we can continue this talk, because believe it or not, i like the discusiion, and theres much more to be said.:)

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#166397 May 31, 2013
T-Town Clown wrote:
<quoted text>The bible,creation,miracles,billio ns of believers,my chruch,my pastor,my sunday school,12 men/disciples preached the gospel 2000 yrs ago and now we have billions that believe Jesus Christ is LORD. All but one was put to a horrible death in his name! if it wasn't true they would have been saying hey guys I was just joking!! I don't believe he was the son of GOD.. Im on your side give me a break boys, can't a guy clown around GEE-WHIZ... they died like men and said Jesus Christ is lord... this are just a few !!!!! there are tons more reasons..... I feel when I accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and savior! was the best choice I ever made... I will never regret it this I know...
You lack of intelligence is truly breathtaking.

Since: May 13

Trenton, NJ

#166398 May 31, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Doesn't it concern you that your religion has you defending slavery?
lol im not defending slavery, im ning the culture and the way things are. its not an argument for or against God. its just a fun discussion to have that can lead to more fruitful discussions.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#166399 May 31, 2013
Ray puelerico wrote:
<quoted text>
3 quick points because it your asserting claims rather than supporting them logically, and appealing to the peronal dislike of the thing rather than dealing with it within the cultural context as well as within the logic.
1. my argument is factual, i not once have to appeal to emotion or anything you cant look up yourself to describe the way things were. what your argument consists of is a projection of your morals on top of that historical information of how things were. now the problem with your argument is that you dont interact with the history or the culture, ou merely take the cultural ideas we have now and push it ontop of the culture. and that doensnt work given the fac t that you havent even described the moral framework you have.
2. a beating doesnt have to be vicious for someone to end up almost dying or for them to die. there are people who get hit with one punch and they die because of being hit in a certain place or way. ive personally been in fights where people get knocked out in one hit, let alone some of the damage thats done.
3. again, your argument lacks foundation to defend the claims its making. are you telling me, that no matter what the shape or form or culture of the time, slavery is the same in all aspects? because since you lack the desire to even defend your views beyond your personal dislike of how things are persented to you, i have to ask background questions to even understand where your views are coming from. you havent even presented any historical data to back up your claims that people got allong without slavery. all cultures at some point or another had slavery in some way, shape, or form.
im not really serious in dealing with your post because it seems to me like your objections are little more than personal dislike. your not really relating it to anything. i know your an intelligent person, no doubt, but you have to form your arguments better than just personal dislikes of the wording. you need factual, historical comparisons.
Yes, slavery is always wrong. Why would your god be influenced by the morality of a specific culture anyway?

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#166400 May 31, 2013
Ray puelerico wrote:
<quoted text>
lol im not defending slavery, im ning the culture and the way things are. its not an argument for or against God. its just a fun discussion to have that can lead to more fruitful discussions.
Why should your god be influenced by the cultural mores of the time? Wouldn't he just tell everyone that slavery is wrong? I can never believe the lengths that christians will go to justify the fact that the bible, and therefore god, are ok with slavery.

Can we agree that slavery is flat out wrong? There is no need to get into the cultural issues - I understand that it was a pretty widespread institution and that it was more or less accepted as a fact of life at the time - but it was still wrong. Assuming that we can agree that slavery is in fact wrong in any situation, then an explanation as to why your god would give it his tacit approval is warranted. Didn't your god know that more "enlightened" cultures would look on his words as hopelessly backwards? Didn't he know that slave owners in pre civil war US would use his words to justify slavery? Didn't he know that refusing to condemn slavery in his one and only book would make him look rather stupid?

When you try to justify the bible's view on slavery with appeals to the historical cultures found in the bible - all you are doing is weakening the case that the bible is in fact the word of god. The word of god should not be subject to the constantly changing cultural whims of his subjects. You are strengthening the case that the bible is nothing more than the collected opinions of a bunch of rural, superstitious people. "I think slavery is pretty ok, so god must think so too!" LOL

“YO BOO”

Since: Sep 07

land of BOO

#166401 May 31, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>You lack of intelligence is truly breathtaking.
Hey, lost and lonely ... you still haven't proved that there isn't a GOD! Not one single once of evidence from your "somewhere over the rainbow posts

“YO BOO”

Since: Sep 07

land of BOO

#166402 May 31, 2013
_-Alice-_ wrote:
<quoted text>
You still go to Sunday School?
Oh hell.
every week

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 3 min Riverside Rednek 46,461
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 17 min exposingm0r0ns 692,007
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 19 min exposingm0r0ns 990,690
Why are Europeans a race of savages, thieves, a... (Jun '15) 25 min Exposing Devil Lies 393
God is REAL - Miracles Happen! (Jun '11) 2 hr Eagle 12 - 6,705
Jeffreys: Evangelicals will vote for Moore 3 hr Edthirty 7
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 14 hr Dec 2017 News 445,848
More from around the web